[ANN][XCP] Counterparty - Pioneering Peer-to-Peer Finance - Official Thread

[Bellebite2014]

I figure I lost 16.7 XCP at poloniex. It would be nice if it came back or whatever, but I doubt it.

how about my Gox??   

Might need some time, AKA never ... You can't even get paid back in Frappucino...

[pgbit]

I figure I lost 16.7 XCP at poloniex. It would be nice if it came back or whatever, but I doubt it.

how about my Gox??   

Might need some time, AKA never ... You can't even get paid back in Frappucino...

fwiw, I just heard from poloniex support saying they hope to make comment tomorrow, and that XCP short by 12%.

[halfcab123]

When I make a send, its saying insufficient bitcoins need ~0.0003172
and I have 0.0011 on the address.. whats the deal is that not enough ?

[520Bit]

When I make a send, its saying insufficient bitcoins need ~0.0003172
and I have 0.0011 on the address.. whats the deal is that not enough ?

Type counterpartyd wallet to see if your address has sufficient bicoins.

[mtbitcoin]

Actually, I think C:\Python32\python.exe setup.py update gets the master branch, and to rebuild the 8.0 database you have to pull the develop branch.

But I have no clue on how to do it. I'm just waiting the devs to update the master branch, and I guess they have more important things to address right now.

This explains why after I update, I am still on v6.0

Yes, the version 8 db is from the develop branch.

Blockscan is running the develop branch so that we are always up todate and to also assist in finding bugs (if any)

[halfcab123]

When I make a send, its saying insufficient bitcoins need ~0.0003172
and I have 0.0011 on the address.. whats the deal is that not enough ?

Type counterpartyd wallet to see if your address has sufficient bicoins.

That query yields 0.007 BTC
and yet still throwing that error ... insufficient bitcoins
Is the send command basing the balance off a different number of minimum confirmations then
the other queries ?

[halfcab123]

When I make a send, its saying insufficient bitcoins need ~0.0003172
and I have 0.0011 on the address.. whats the deal is that not enough ?

Type counterpartyd wallet to see if your address has sufficient bicoins.

That query yields 0.007 BTC
and yet still throwing that error ... insufficient bitcoins
Is the send command basing the balance off a different number of minimum confirmations then
the other queries ?

I think I might be right about that, because blockchain.info is showing 'unconfirmed' transaction

[danonthehill]

Okay, people seem to think donations are the best way to go. I agree. I think taxing Poloniex balances or everyone's XCP balances would be disastrous.

I have created a thread on the Counterparty forums for donations: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,127.0.html

The total missing is actually about 6100 XCP instead of 7000, as some people had not yet withdrawn and I was able to deduct balances.

Your donations are greatly appreciated, and as soon as the missing XCP is covered, I will open up withdrawals so people can get at their XCP.

And the BTC balance?

[delulo]

was the bug actually fixed with the 0.6 client?
and the only remaining problem is that funds might have been lost from poloniex?

[SyRenity]

The development team has extended a 12 BTC reward to the hacker for finding the security flaws, contingent upon returning the missing BTC. We are waiting to hear back.

We have offered these BTC out of our pockets, but, beyond that, we hope the community can pull together to make things right. As a reminder, the donation address for the security bouty is: <14Tf35AovvRVURzd623q5i9kry2EW8WzyL>.

What we do next depends on what the hacker does.

Regarding the discussion on a XCP "tax" or "re-burn", we can state this: The strength of Counterparty's community helps differentiate us from other projects, and it is precisely that strength which makes it clear it is best not to introduce a new burn period.

While the protocol will become more secure and robust as time goes on and our community grows, it is also the case that if there are serious bugs in the future, more people will be affected, and, as a project, Counterparty will have more to lose. Our decisions now will determine how the community evolves, and by demonstrating our collective firmness, we are setting important precedent for the future: those who invest in XCP are investing in a currency with a stable money supply, the integrity of which will be maintained even in difficult circumstances.

Take Bitcoin as an example: there have been times in Bitcoin's history where a serious bug could have been dealt with by, for example, increasing the total number of Bitcoins. If this had happened, would Bitcoin still be seen as an example of stable money supply and good store-of-value?

The seriousness of this bug should not be underplayed, but by taking our growing pains in their stride, we are strengthening Counterparty for the future.

Good explanation cityglut! We're all behind you!  

Thanks for your great leadership!  

Lets donate guys - we all want to put this behind us as quickly as possible!  

+1 on this - just give us the wallet already so we could do this in simple fashion (I'm afraid I will kill my HD every time I need to catch up some BTC blocks ).

[SyRenity]

Okay, people seem to think donations are the best way to go. I agree. I think taxing Poloniex balances or everyone's XCP balances would be disastrous.

I have created a thread on the Counterparty forums for donations: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,127.0.html

The total missing is actually about 6100 XCP instead of 7000, as some people had not yet withdrawn and I was able to deduct balances.

Your donations are greatly appreciated, and as soon as the missing XCP is covered, I will open up withdrawals so people can get at their XCP.

Can we all assume (without obligating you publicly to anything of course), that once the community covers this sum for you, the XCP/BTC trading will be restored on Poloniex?

[Spekulatius]

I know you mean well and recovering the XCP would be good for the community at large.

There is no reason to think that these users knew that there was something malicious going on when they took their gains.

Allow the users to make the choice themselves without being coerced.

I don't think any user knew that there was something malicious going on when they took their gains (I myself bought some xcp @ 0.002)
but now we do know exactly what happened.

If i understand what you are saying than why don't allow all of poloniex users to make the choice for themselves and don't rollback?

the answer is simple in my opinion - if we can get everything back to where it was before the 35,000 xcp sell that will be the best thing for all users. For clarification i don't think any treats should be used i just think it will be helpful if we knew who we need to speak to in order to get this situation behind us asap.

I totally agree. I just don't want people getitng the wrong ideas  

Yes why dont roll back the database to before the dump so the 6100 outstanding XCP are back to where they legitimately belong? (given busoni restores the BTC balances of those that withdrew their 6100 XCP after the dump because they would be out of BTC and XCP)

[busoni]

Yes, I fully intend to restore the BTC/XCP market once everything is resolved, with some new security measures to prevent this happening again even if a similar exploit is discovered.

[busoni]

I know you mean well and recovering the XCP would be good for the community at large.

There is no reason to think that these users knew that there was something malicious going on when they took their gains.

Allow the users to make the choice themselves without being coerced.

I don't think any user knew that there was something malicious going on when they took their gains (I myself bought some xcp @ 0.002)
but now we do know exactly what happened.

If i understand what you are saying than why don't allow all of poloniex users to make the choice for themselves and don't rollback?

the answer is simple in my opinion - if we can get everything back to where it was before the 35,000 xcp sell that will be the best thing for all users. For clarification i don't think any treats should be used i just think it will be helpful if we knew who we need to speak to in order to get this situation behind us asap.

I totally agree. I just don't want people getitng the wrong ideas  

Yes why dont roll back the database to before the dump so the 6100 outstanding XCP are back to where they legitimately belong? (given busoni restores the BTC balances of those that withdrew their 6100 XCP after the dump because they would be out of BTC and XCP)

Which database are you talking about--Poloniex's or Counterparty's?

[kdrop22]

When I make a send, its saying insufficient bitcoins need ~0.0003172
and I have 0.0011 on the address.. whats the deal is that not enough ?

After you make a send operation. You need to wait for one confirmation(waiting for the change will be sent back to your address). , before you can send again.

[delulo]

was the bug actually fixed with the 0.6 client?
and the only remaining problem is that funds might have been lost from poloniex?

does onyone have a quick answer here?

[kdrop22]

was the bug actually fixed with the 0.6 client?
and the only remaining problem is that funds might have been lost from poloniex?

does onyone have a quick answer here?

Yes

[cityglut]

Announcement: Desktop GUI bounty funds to be distributed.

The funds at the bounty address amount to:

• 7.41790989 BTC
• 1856.13963636 XCP

There were two submissions for the "desktop GUI" bounty - one from JahPowerBit, and one from btcfanatic. Between these two users, funds at the bounty address will be split thus:

• JahPowerBit will receive: 4.45074594 BTC and 1113.68378182 XCP
• btcfanatic will receive: 2.96716395 BTC and 742.45585454 XCP

In other words, JahPowerBit will receive 60% of the bounty funds, and btcfanatic will receive 40% of the bounty funds.

JahPowerBit has demonstrated enthusiasm and initiative, and has made a functioning web GUI. He has also detailed his plans for the future, and has recruited other community members to help him achieve the goals he has set out.

JahPowerBit's GUI has wider functionality than btcfanatic's, but btcfanatic's architecture was more what we had in mind. With that said, we imagine users will have a harder time getting btcfanatic's GUI to work than JahPowerBit's.

While both GUIs are cross-platform, they lack build systems for Windows. Going forward, this is very important.

We strongly encourage the community to get involved: test out the GUIs, interact and collaborate with the developers, and give them feedback. Counterparty is a community driven project, and will progress most effectively if the community works together.

Thanks very much to both JahPowerBit and btcfanatic for participating in the Desktop GUI bounty, and helping the Counterparty protocol become more user-friendly. And thanks to the community for providing donations, to help motivate developers.

We are discussing further bounties which should leverage what has been achieve with the desktop GUI bounty. Please stay tuned.

btcfanatic and JahPowerBit, please email your addresses to <bounties@counterparty.co>.

This is cross-posted from the bounty thread on the official Counterparty forums.

EDIT: Of course, here are the GUI submissions:

• JahPowerBit's: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,8.msg501.html#msg501.
• btcfanatic's: https://forums.counterparty.co/index.php/topic,8.msg579.html#msg579.

[Anotheranonlol]

Has anybody created GoxBTC -> RealBTC listing on DEX?

Maybe someone can take advantage. market is ripe for it.

[cityglut]

Has anybody created GoxBTC -> RealBTC listing on DEX?

Maybe someone can take advantage. market is ripe for it.

Actually, those who have their money on Mt. Gox could have made a BearCFD in order to hedge against the price on Mt. Gox decreasing. Of course, this would have required someone who was "long" Mt. Gox, which would probably have been difficult.